DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 15, 16, 18, 19, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US 20220051067 A1) in view of Paz-Pujalt (US 5843599 A) and Dan (CN 107235710 A)
Re Claim 15: Zheng discloses
An identification card (fig 3: 300), including:
a ceramic substrate which includes a main body (fig 3: 310) having opposite surfaces;
wherein the ceramic substrate includes a film arranged on each of the surfaces of the main body (p82: an ink layer formed on the surface of the ceramic substrate or the first/second resin material layer by methods of printing or the like for providing a personalized pattern);
accommodating slots (fig 3: 320, 330) are provided on the ceramic substrate, which slots are located on opposite surfaces of the main body, and
penetrate the film on the opposite surfaces (fig 3, p76) and the accommodating slots have a bottom surface and an opening opposite to the bottom surface; and
an information identification part (fig 3: 322, 332) arranged in the accommodating slots,
wherein the information identification part includes a chip part (p77: a contact IC chip, a non-contact IC chip, anti-counterfeit chip) and an information marking part (p80: the second decorative feature), orthographic projections of the chip part and the information marking part on the ceramic substrate do not overlap, and in a thickness direction of the identification card, the chip part has opposite lower and upper surfaces, and the lower surface faces the bottom surface of the accommodating slots for accommodating the chip part, and the upper surface does not protrude from the opening of the accommodating slots for accommodating the chip part (p76: the height of an embedded element is substantially aligned with an opening of the first recess(es) 320).
However, Zheng does not disclose that a main component in manufacturing of the main body is zirconia powder.
Paz-Pujalt however discloses that a main component in manufacturing of the main body is zirconia powder (col 4 ll 42+: The basic steps of preparing the printing articles include powder preparation by alloying the zirconia oxide with one or more of the secondary oxides. These powders are then consolidated to a desired shape, preferably having a planar writing surface.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Paz-Pujalt’s teaching in the card of Zheng for the purpose of enabling creation of high quality image using a laser (Paz-Pujalt: col 2 ll 17: image quality on printing is unsurpassed).
However, Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt does not disclose that the film is an anti-fingerprint film.
Dan however discloses that the film is an anti-fingerprint film (anti-fingerprint coating the rough blank to obtain the mobile phone card).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Dan’s teaching in the card of Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt for the purpose of preventing fingerprints.
Re Claim 16: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan discloses the identification card according to claim 15 except for the particle size of the zirconia powder being 20 nm-40 um (Paz-Pujalt: an average grain size of from about 0.1 to about 0.6 nm and preferably from about 0.2 to about 0.5 nm.). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify the particle size of the zirconia powder, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Re Claim 18: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan discloses the identification card according to claim 15, wherein the zirconia powder is yttrium stabilized zirconia (Paz-Pujalt: the preferred zirconia alloy ceramic for use in this invention is an alloy of zirconium oxide (ZrO.sub.2) and yttrium oxide (Y.sub.2 O.sub.3)).
Re Claim 19: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan discloses the identification card according to claim 15, wherein the information identification part further includes fixing layers (fig 3: 321, 331), and the chip part and the information marking part are respectively fixed on different fixing layers, and the fixing layers are connected and in contact with the accommodating slots.
Re Claim 23: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan discloses the identification card according to claim 15, wherein the information marking part includes at least one of a magnetic strip, a bank logo, a signature strip, (p55: the first information storage medium may include…, for example, at least one of a contact IC chip, a non-contact IC chip, a magnetic strip, and a signature strip. p80: the second information storage medium, the second security feature, and the second decorative feature are respectively the same classes of features as the first information storage medium) and a card body pattern part, and the bank logo and the card body pattern part are provided in a three-dimensional metal form (Examiner: the bank logo and the card body pattern part are ones among the optional features.).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US 20220051067 A1) modified by Paz-Pujalt (US 5843599 A) and Dan (CN 107235710 A) in view of Hu (CN 110557478 B) and Lowe (FI 4109337 T3).
Re Claim 17: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan discloses the identification card according to claim 16.
However, Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan does not disclose that at least part of the anti-fingerprint film is covered with a pattern layer.
Hu however discloses that part of anti-fingerprint film is covered with a pattern layer (the surface texture layer adopts fine pattern printing, ultraviolet transfer printing, laser carving or film plating technique. the surface texture layer is used for increasing the uniqueness of the shell, so that the shell has individual pattern appearance, avoiding homogeneity.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Hu’s teaching in the card of Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan for the purpose of providing individual pattern appearance and avoiding homogeneity (Hu).
However, Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt Dan and Hu does not disclose that the pattern layer is formed by at least one of the following processes: ultraviolet color printing, laser inkjet printing, and porcelain offset printing.
Lowe however discloses that a pattern layer is formed by at least one of the following processes: ultraviolet color printing (UV-curable printing inks), laser inkjet printing, and porcelain offset printing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Lowe’s teaching in the card of Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt Dan and Hu for the advantageous results of UV printing such as high-resolution, vibrant, and scratch-resistant prints.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US 20220051067 A1) modified by Paz-Pujalt (US 5843599 A) and Dan (CN 107235710 A) in view of Herslow (US 10783422 B2).
Re Claim 20: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan discloses the identification card according to claim 15, wherein the main body includes a substrate that is ceramic.
However, Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan does not disclose that a first substrate and a second substrate connected to each other, and the accommodating slots are provided on at least one of the first substrate and the second substrate.
Herslow discloses that a first substrate and a second substrate connected to each other (fig 2 & 3b), and the accommodating slots (fig 2: 225a, 225b) are provided on at least one of the first substrate and the second substrate.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Herslow’s teaching in the card of Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt and Dan for the purpose of creating a luxurious alternative to standard plastic cards. By combining a rigid ceramic material with other layers (such as plastic or metal for antenna integration), the resulting cards provide a “premium” feel, look, or tactile feature that may be marketed to an affluent market (Herslow: col 1 ll 36+).
Claim(s) 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US 20220051067 A1) modified by Paz-Pujalt (US 5843599 A) Dan (CN 107235710 A) and Herslow (US 10783422 B2) in view of Kim (US 20140184461 A1).
Re Claim 21: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt Dan and Herslow discloses the identification card according to claim 20, wherein a substrate is ceramic.
However, Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt Dan and Herslow does not disclose that a pre-laminated layer in contact with the chip part is provided between the first substrate and the second substrate, and the chip part is connected to an antenna part of the pre-laminated layer.
Kim however discloses that a pre-laminated layer (fig 1: 12) in contact with the chip part is provided between the first substrate (fig 1: 15) and the second substrate (fig 1: 10), and the chip part is connected to an antenna part of the pre-laminated layer (Examiner: for NFC to function, a chip has to be connected to an antenna.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinarily skill in the art to incorporate Kim’s teaching in the card of Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt Dan and Herslow for the purpose of achieving near field communication.
Re Claim 22: Zheng modified by Paz-Pujalt Dan Herslow and Kim discloses the identification card according to claim 21, wherein a groove (Herslow fig 3b: 240) matching the second ceramic substrate (Herslow fig 3b: 205) is provided on the surface of the first ceramic substrate (Herslow fig 3b: 210, col 4 ll 36+: substrate layer 210 may be one … inorganic (e.g., glass, ceramic, cellulosic) material.) opposite to the second ceramic substrate, so that the second ceramic substrate is arranged in the groove (Herslow fig 3b, Examiner: Herslow discloses that substrate layer 210 may be ceramic. Thus, accordingly, substrate layer 210 can be the first ceramic substrate.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the use of Zirconia Powder (Paz-Pujalt) The applicant argues that
Paz-Pujalt teaches a zirconia insert in a polymeric substrate, rather than a zirconia main body for an identification card. This argument misses the point of the 103 analysis. Paz-Pujalt is cited not for the specific "insert" geometry, but for the material composition and manufacturing method of the ceramic member.
Paz-Pujalt explicitly teaches that "the basic steps of preparing the printing articles include powder preparation by alloying the zirconia oxide... These powders are then consolidated to a desired shape" (Col 4, ll 42+). A person of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would recognize that the material properties of zirconia—specifically its high durability, abrasion resistance, and superior imaging quality (Col 2, ll 17)—make it an ideal candidate for the "ceramic substrate" disclosed in Zheng. Substituting a generic ceramic substrate with a specific, high-performance zirconia ceramic is a predictable modification to improve the card's longevity and image clarity.
Regarding the Anti-Fingerprint Film and "Penetration" (Dan) The applicant contends that because Dan describes the anti-fingerprint coating as a "post-treatment," the resulting slots would not "penetrate" the film. In the context of a surface coating, "penetrating the film" simply means that the opening of the slot provides a path through the layer of the film to the substrate beneath. Whether the coating is applied to a pre-existing slot (resulting in a coating that lines the slot) or the slot is machined through a pre-existing coating, the physical result is the same: the slot penetrates the film layer on the surface of the main body.
Furthermore, the applicant's argument that Dan is directed to a "phone tray" rather than an "identification card" is irrelevant. Both are small, precision-molded ceramic components requiring surface durability and aesthetic cleanliness. It would be obvious to a PHOSITA to apply a known anti-fingerprint treatment for ceramic components (Dan) to a ceramic identification card (Zheng) to prevent the accumulation of oils and smudges, which is a common problem for handheld cards.
Regarding the "Ink Layer" and Hindsight The applicant argues that the examiner incorrectly equated Zheng's "ink layer" with an "anti-fingerprint film." To clarify, the ink layer in Zheng was used to establish the presence of a surface layer that is penetrated by slots. The functional requirement of the film being "anti-fingerprint" is explicitly provided by the teaching of Dan.
The combination of these references is not a "mosaic" created by hindsight, but a logical assembly of:
- Zheng: The structural framework (ceramic substrate, opposite slots, non-overlapping chip/marking parts).
- Paz-Pujalt: The material optimization (zirconia powder for durability and imaging).
- Dan: The surface optimization (anti-fingerprint coating for a ceramic body).
Each modification serves a distinct, documented purpose: improving the substrate material, improving the surface cleanliness, and maintaining the structural integrity of the card. The result of combining these known elements is predictable and does not produce a synergistic effect that would render the invention non-obvious.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAE W KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5971. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30AM-5:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven S Paik can be reached at 5712722404. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAE W KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2876
/THIEN M LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights